On Tue, Feb 19, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Hannes Reinecke <h...@suse.de> wrote: >> > Apparently this device is meant to use MSI _only_ so the BIOS developer > didn't feel the need to assign an INTx here. > > According to PCI-3.0, section 6.8 (Message Signalled Interrupts): >> It is recommended that devices implement interrupt pins to >> provide compatibility in systems that do not support MSI >> (devices default to interrupt pins). However, it is expected >> that the need for interrupt pins will diminish over time. >> Devices that do not support interrupt pins due to pin >> constraints (rely on polling for device service) may implement >> messages to increase performance without adding additional pins. > >> Therefore, system configuration software must not assume that a >> message capable device has an interrupt pin. > > Which sounds to me as if the implementation is valid...
it seems you mess pin with interrupt line. current code: unsigned char irq; pci_read_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_PIN, &irq); dev->pin = irq; if (irq) pci_read_config_byte(dev, PCI_INTERRUPT_LINE, &irq); dev->irq = irq; so if the device does not have interrupt pin implemented, pin should be zero. and pin and irq in dev should be all 0. Thanks Yinghai -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/